House of the Dragon; Investigating Diana

“By the end of the first hour, all the main pieces are in play, countless political, domestic and actual storms are brewing, old alliances are being broken, new ones formed and treachery is never more than a spear’s length away. House of the Dragon looks set fair to become the game of political seven-dimensional chess that its predecessor was, designed to reward diehard fantasy fans in full measure without alienating the masses that will propel it to the top of the ratings.”
Lucy Mangan, The Guardian

“Although House of the Dragon is a prequel, I prefer to think of it, in keeping with language of the programme itself, as Game of Thrones’s heir. And like any heir, it’s under a lot of pressure to live up to its illustrious predecessor. One episode is far too soon to judge whether it will do so. But we can sense that it’s going to offer a plot of similar tension and complexity, in the looming struggle to succeed the weary and battered old King Viserys (Paddy Considine).”
Michael Deacon, The Telegraph

“It’s not a radically new story, but HOTD is still a tantalising premise. Even the most critically acclaimed shows have densely packed premieres because they have so much exposition to shift, and this is no different, though it’s a thrill just to be back in Westeros. If it remains insulated from the pressure to compete with GoT, House of the Dragon could be a worthy successor in the vein of Breaking Bad spin-offBetter Call Saul.”
Chris Mandle, The i

“Where its predecessor opened with an introspective, family-focused look at life in the dour North, House of the Dragon swoops onto our screens with beating wings, urban panoramas and, quite literally, fire and blood. And fans of breasts, bums and dismembered penises need not worry – for all the talk of toning down Thrones’ notorious nudity, there’s still plenty on display here.”
Nick Hilton, The Independent

“Investigating Diana comes on as if it wants to be this summer’s Tiger King or Making a Murderer. In 1997, the death of Diana signified, in part, the softening of the British stiff upper lip, a curious unleashing of grief among many for a woman they barely knew. Today it means something else: Investigating Diana gratifies our obsessive gaze with a real-life CSI Paris that drags the story out over inordinate length.”
Stuart Jeffries, The Guardian

“To its credit it assembled impressive witnesses. There were the actual French investigators who talked about their actual investigation, not people in tinfoil hats and 5G-proof knickers who literally think Prince Philip cut the brake pipes. It featured a doctor who was involved, and some of the paparazzi following her car that night. This series is at least trying to get serious witnesses rather than armchair speculators waffling, but whether you want to watch all this stuff again is your call. Especially when the simple, tragic truth is surely that the driver was drunk and Diana wasn’t wearing a seatbelt.”
Carol Midgley, The Times

“Channel 4 managed to pull off a coup by examining the evidence from the perspective of not just the British police but the French cops tasked with finding the truth amid the swirl of pregnancy rumours, the mystery white Fiat Uno and crackpot conspiracy theories courtesy of the freshly minted world wide web.”
Judith Woods, The Telegraph